Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Top Stories

Reports: More than 530,000 mail ballots rejected during primaries

mail ballots sorting

An election worker sorts ballots following the Washington state primary in August.

Jason Redmond/Getty Images

A pair of major media outlets independently reported over the weekend that states have collectively rejected at least 530,000 mail-in ballots during the 2020 primaries.

On Saturday, NPR reported that at least 550,000 mail-in votes were rejected across 30 states that have made the data available. In most cases, ballots were denied because of problems with signatures or the ballots arrived late. The next day, The Washington Post reported on 534,000 rejected ballots in 23 states. Both reports noted that their counts are sure to be well below the actual totals because some states and local jurisdictions have not made the data available to the public.

The data, coupled with ongoing state-level fights over ballot access, indicates a messy Election Day.


The Covid-19 pandemic has led to a massive increase in voting by mail in 2020 as well as election staffing shortages. Add in mail delays, and it was already clear that ballot counting will not be complete on Nov. 3. Legal battles are being waged across the country over election system changes that in most states are designed to make it easier to vote amid the health crisis.

President Trump has been baselessly claiming that mail-in voting is a breeding ground for election fraud, and his campaign has taken legal action in a number of states. The courtroom battles are sure to continue after Election Day, as the Republican and Democratic parties can be expected to contest ballot counts in any tight race. For example, in Pennsylvania — which President Trump won by just 44,000 votes in 2016, 37,000 ballots were tossed in the June primary, according to NPR.

Read the full reports from NPR and the Post.

Read More

Members of a women's softball team cheerfully join hands during practice on a sunny day, showcasing team spirit, cooperation, and enthusiasm for the sport.

Do trans women have a strength advantage? A look at studies on hormone therapy, muscle mass, and why it should determine eligibility in women's sports.

luza studios/Getty Images

Trans Females Are Not Biological Males - Let Them Play on Female Teams

Most Americans, Democrats as well as Republicans—many following the lead of President Trump—feel that it is not right for trans females to participate in women's sports. But the trans community, supported by those on the left wing of the Democratic Party, insists that this is part of ensuring the rights of trans people. The issue has been divisive among Democrats.

This is a complex issue. On the one hand, boys are boys, and girls are girls. That's the basic fact behind male and female sports, other than some intramural school sports that have boys and girls on the same team. Because boys are biologically stronger and faster than girls, separate leagues have been developed for both. This has nothing to do with gender identity; it is just a reflection of biological fact.

Keep ReadingShow less
An aerial view of a Flock camera

An aerial view of a Flock camera in Burbank, California. U.S. President Donald Trump expressed support for Flock cameras, saying he likes the AI-powered surveillance technology because of its use by law enforcement, despite concerns that it infringes on privacy.

(Photo by Justin Sullivan/Getty Images)

Flock Cameras Are Coming Down – but We Need More To Dismantle the Surveillance State

Chances are, you’ve seen one in your neighborhood. Flock cameras have become a major flashpoint for voters in the leadup to the midterms. The concept sounds straight out of 1984 — a network of government-owned cameras that track your movements — it’s no wonder that Americans across party lines are demanding their states and towns sever ties with the controversial company. Surveillance fears are only getting stronger as we enter the AI era.

But the problem isn’t just Flock. These cameras, Automated License Plate Readers or ALPRs to be exact, are a symptom of a larger “surveil first, ask questions later” attitude that has been adopted by local and federal government for decades. In recent years, the federal government has been dramatically expanding the nation’s surveillance infrastructure. This has taken many forms, from facial recognition technology at the airport, to law enforcement monitoring your mail, to the government watching what you’re posting on your personal social media pages. Since April, many Democrats and Republicans in Congress have united to stop what would effectively be a blank check for surveillance via FISA reauthorization, demanding surveillance reforms such as closing the “data broker loophole”, which allows the government to buy Americans’ personal data without a warrant.

Keep ReadingShow less